The High Court has dismissed a challenge to An Bord Pleanála’s refusal to retain a detached garage converted into family-flat accommodation for a woman with additional needs at her family home in County Kildare.
Karla Moran sought permission to retain the 100-square-metre, two-storey garage conversion so she could live more independently while remaining close to her mother, who is her registered carer and owns the property. The proposal also included a 20-metre glazed link between the garage and the family home.
Kildare County Council refused permission. Moran appealed, but An Bord Pleanála also refused the application in October 2023. The Board accepted that she had a genuine need for family-flat accommodation but found that the proposal did not comply with the Kildare County Development Plan 2023-2029.
The Board relied on the garage being a stand-alone structure about 20 metres from the house. It also found that the glazed link would affect rear open space and visual amenity and that the arrangement did not adequately reflect the temporary nature of a family flat or facilitate later reintegration into the main dwelling.
Moran challenged that reasoning in judicial review proceedings. She argued, among other things, that distance and scale had been treated as requirements not expressly contained in the Development Plan and that conditions could have dealt with the glazed link and duration of the use.
Ms Justice Emily Farrell rejected those arguments. She held that scale and the relationship between a family flat and the main house were plainly relevant planning considerations. The Development Plan expressly referred to subdivision or extension of a dwelling, direct connection, subsidiary scale and eventual return to a single dwelling unit.
The court also held that the Board was not legally required to redesign the application through conditions. Removing the glazed link would itself leave the proposal contrary to the requirement for connection to the main house.
The judge stressed that Moran’s personal circumstances had been considered. However, sympathetic circumstances did not create a right to override planning policy. The proceedings were dismissed.